JUST IN: Obama Judge Grants Georgia Election Workers Request to Expedite Their $148 Million Judgment Against Giuliani to Prevent Him From ‘Concealing’ Assets – Before His Appeal

Obama-appointed Judge Beryl Howell on Wednesday ordered immediate enforcement of Georgia election workers Ruby Freeman and Wandrea “Shaye” Moss’s $148 million judgment against Rudy Giuliani.

Judge Beryl Howell

The defamation suit was related to Giuliani’s statements about the two Georgia election workers seen on surveillance video from the State Farm Arena tabulation center on election night in 2020.

Video played at a Georgia Senate hearing in December 2020 allegedly showed the election workers scanning ballots without an independent state monitor present.

Judge Beryl Howell unitlaterally decided that Rudy Giuliani was guilty of defamation after he was late turning in a financial statement in the lawfare case.

A DC jury last week decided then that Giuliani should pay the two plaintiffs $148 million in the DC courtroom.

Rudy Giuliani was not allowed to present any evidence on his behalf in the court proceedings.

The above image is of security footage at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta.
The above image is of security footage at the State Farm Arena in Atlanta. (@EpochTimes / Twitter video screen shot)

“Freeman and Moss subsequently asked the judge to “permit immediate enforcement” of the judgment out of concern that the former New York City mayor could attempt to “find a way to dissipate [his] assets before plaintiffs are able to recover.” – ABC News reported.

“Judge Beryl Howell agreed Wednesday that Giuliani’s record as an “unwilling and uncooperative litigant” provides the plaintiffs “good cause to believe that he will seek to dissipate or conceal his assets” before paying them,” the outlet reported.

Ruby Freeman and Wandrea “Shaye” Moss sued Rudy Giuliani again on Monday seeking to “permanently bar” him from making public statements about them related to their involvement in counting ballots in the 2020 presidential election.

WASHINGTON, DC – JUNE 21: Wandrea ArShaye “Shaye” Moss (L), former Georgia election worker, is comforted by her mother Ruby Freeman (R) as Moss testifies during the fourth hearing on the January 6th investigation in the Cannon House Office Building on June 21, 2022 in Washington, DC. The bipartisan committee, which has been gathering evidence for almost a year related to the January 6 attack at the U.S. Capitol, is presenting its findings in a series of televised hearings. On January 6, 2021, supporters of former President Donald Trump attacked the U.S. Capitol Building during an attempt to disrupt a congressional vote to confirm the electoral college win for President Joe Biden. (Photo by Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images)

“The two women asked the court to prevent Giuliani from “making or publishing … further statements repeating any and all false claims that plaintiffs engaged in election fraud, illegal activity, or misconduct of any kind during or related to the 2020 presidential election.” ABC News reported.

The new lawsuit comes after a DC jury on Friday ruled that Rudy Giuliani owes plaintiffs $148 MILLION in Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss’ lawsuit against him for alleged defamation after he claimed the two women contributed to voter fraud in Georgia’s 2020 election.

Obama-appointed Judge Beryl Howell decided Giuliani was liable for defaming Ruby Freeman and Shaye Moss because he didn’t turn over electronic devices the FBI confiscated from him.

Because of the default judgment, Rudy Giuliani was unable to present any evidence, including the State Farm Arena surveillance video, to back up his claims.

Giuliani spoke to The Gateway Pundit’s Jordan Conradson exclusively on Friday night to share his thoughts and plans to appeal the DC Court’s finding that he defamed Georgia 2020 election workers.

“My next steps are going to be to appeal it.” Giuliani told TGP’s Jordan Conradson, “It is going to take a while because there’s so much to appeal.”

“I don’t think it could even be described as a trial, because the trial allows you to offer evidence in your defense. I was prohibited from doing that. I was even sort of subtly threatened with jail if I did it, of being held in contempt. So, there are many points on appeal: the fact that she found liability based on a failure of discovery when there were thousands of documents discovered, and I did a deposition, full and complete, without taking the Fifth Amendment and answered all their questions. I’ve never heard of you find somebody guilty based on they didn’t turn over a document. And of this magnitude. I guess the simplest way to put it is at no point did I have an opportunity to offer any evidence in my defense. There was no trial on the merits; she decided it peremptorily. And then, when I tried to do it to mitigate the damages, I was told that I would be contradicting what she had found, and I’d be in contempt of the orders,” Rudy told Conradson.

Photo of author
Cristina began writing for The Gateway Pundit in 2016 and she is now the Associate Editor.

You can email Cristina Laila here, and read more of Cristina Laila's articles here.


Thanks for sharing!